After years of warnings, campaigning and frontline exhaustion, the new Sentencing Review has acknowledged what Napo and our members have been saying all along. The Probation Service is in crisis.
The review offers a roadmap for long-overdue change, but will it be actioned in a meaningful way any time soon? Napo will push for immediate action because this once in a generation moment is too important to waste.
The root issues faced by Probation were clearly laid out in the review. A service overburdened, underfunded, and pushed away from its core purpose. The drift toward a law enforcement culture at the expense of rehabilitation was highlighted. That shift, as Napo has consistently argued, has left our members caught between rising caseloads, public safety pressures, and a system too rigid to respond to real human need.
“This review offers some hope for the future,” says General Secretary Ian Lawrence, “but Napo has been asking HMPPS to make many of these changes over the last 2 years to little avail.”
Rehabilitation, not surveillance
One of the most welcome elements of the review is its call to revoke Rehabilitation Activity Requirements. In their place, it proposes returning to a more flexible model — a single Probation Requirement that can be tailored to the individual.
This change would help put professional discretion back where it belongs: in the hands of the practitioner. For years, members have voiced frustration over a tick-box culture that does little to reduce reoffending, but a lot to increase stress.
The review also calls for greater balance between enforcement and engagement. That’s a major step forward — but implementation will be everything. And with HMPPS still at the helm, you can’t blame the many that remain doubtful.
A system still in crisis
Napo has made no secret of its concerns about HMPPS leadership. The Rademaker Review made clear that trust in senior leadership is already hanging by a thread. “Our members will be sceptical as to whether or not senior leaders in HMPPS are capable of making any real change,” says Ian.
But the truth is simple: the current structure is not working. Napo’s submission to the review said as much. The Probation Service cannot survive as a Civil Service agency managed through the Prison Service dominated HMPPS model.
Investment must mean pay
Perhaps the most important point in the Sentencing Review is the call for real investment. But that investment must reach the frontline. As Ian puts it: “Any previous investment in probation has been spent on the private sector for either IT or electronic monitoring. What we need to see now is a direct investment in staff. Without that we will see a continual rise in retention rates and continued staffing crisis.”
This means a pay rise — not just promises of support. “We need a commitment from the government that they will take immediate action not only to implement the recommendations,” Ian adds, “but also to put its hand in its pockets and reward our members with a decent pay rise.”
Early government mistakes
Napo are particularly concerned at two developments following the publication of the Sentencing Review that smack of ill-thought out populist headline grabbing and move far beyond the recommendations offered. As it stands, we will oppose both.
The first relates to announcement by the government of the rapid expansion of pilot schemes relating to certain groups of people who have committed sexual offences, involving medical intervention and ‘chemical suppression’, before a current, smaller-scale pilot – involving voluntary participation – has completed its work on this issue. Of even greater concern are the Lord Chancellor’s remarks that they are prepared to explore the deeply unethical and dangerous proposal to mandate this form of medical intervention. Those involved in advocating for this would do well to reflect on one of the most shameful periods in Probation’s history.
The other relates to the suggestion that Unpaid Work could in future involve those serving such a sentence working for a company in the private sector. Napo are absolutely opposed to any such plans, which amount to forced labour to produce even greater levels of corporate profit. As a trade union we cannot accept proposals which seek to use unwaged labour to replace jobs done by working people. While this government may be happy to trade low-wage work for no-wage work to satisfy the incessant demands of private greed we are not.
These issues demonstrate a significant wider flaw in what appears to be the government’s approach to turning this Sentencing Review into a workable reality. Rather than focusing on existing Probation staff as the key to these plans – as we so clearly are – they seem instead too often pre-occupied by unproven gimmicks and obvious dead-ends.
What comes next?
The review is a step in the right direction. But it is only a step. Napo will hold the government and HMPPS to account — not just on what they say, but on what they do. We will also offer further reflections on the Sentencing Review in the coming days and weeks.
The Probation Service stands at a crossroads. This review offers a rare chance to change direction. But without immediate action, meaningful change, and serious investment, we risk repeating the same cycle of crisis.
Our members have waited long enough. Now we need to see delivery.
